HUFFsters Spread Word on Street and in Mayor's Office Against Anti-Homeless Injunction

Becky Johnson's LETTER TO MAYOR CYNTHIA MATHEWS on behalf of HUFF (contained in a flyer put out by Robert Norse)


Memo to the Mayor: Stop the City Attorney's Bigoted Lawsuit

A letter to Mayor Cynthia Mathews from Becky Johnson of HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) 5-20-09

City Attorney John Barisone has launched a civil suit against a homeless couple, Anna Richardson and Miguel de Leon for 60 citations, 90% of them for illegal sleeping. Normally, under Santa Cruz municipal code, violators are issued infraction citations. These can be prosecuted in a criminal court. Since 2006, infraction citations which have not been adjudicated have been assigned a civil judgment rather than a criminal judgment, for which fines can be assessed,  their wages can be garnished, bank accounts attached, &, for vehicular code violations, their vehicle license a®istration prevented, & driver's license renewals delayed or their license revoked, and the information on non-payment reported to the credit bureaus.

Recent statements made by Mr. John Barisone and Councilmember Ryan Coonerty indicate that this civil judgment is insufficient for people who are already homeless, have ruined credit ratings already, and are forced due to their economic circumstances to illegally sleep at night out of doors. Both indicated that more punishment was needed.

I need not remind the council that the courts and jails are jammed up with thousands of infraction citations issued to homeless people for quality of life crimes such as sleeping, sitting, begging, trespassing, possession of an open container, conduct on public property, and jaywalking. Citations which they can neither pay nor even, in some cases, cease violating the law. Is sleeping at night even a voluntary act? 

It is ironic, at the same point in time in which this new civil violation method, along with the homeless court are finally reducing the over-population at the Santa Cruz County Jail, that Councilmember Ryan Coonerty and the council itself have retreated to making 3 infractions a misdemeanor again, with accompanying jail confinement, jury trials, and public defenders.  This is both unwise policy and fiscally unwarranted.

As if that were not enough cause for concern, now we see the City taking a homeless couple to court for a civil injunction. It seems clear that this couple have run afoul of a few downtown merchants,  who have the option of filing their own civil suit against the couple as their legal remedy according to law. So why is the City rushing in to do their bidding?

I have a neighbor who runs his leaf blower from time to time and it bothers me. Will City Attorney Barisone now take up my civil issue with my neighbor and pay all my court costs?  Why not? Don't you like me as much as the merchant whose legal bills you have decided to pay?

My point of  course is that this case in particular, and other cases of this nature in recent memory ( the case of Jerry Henry in Aptos, and the Koffee Klatch Three case against Bernard Klitzner, Robert Norse, and myself) were all cases where an individual or business had a complaint against a person/persons.

They had the legal option of seeking relief in the courts through the use of a civil complaint. However, when the City (or County with the Jerry Henry prosecuted by George Kovacevich) steps in and pays all legal expenses for any particular litigant. This is a slippery slope for which cronyism and selective prosecutions are the norm. 

Homeless United for Friendship and Freedom (HUFF) has met and resolved to oppose this new tactic in the war on homeless people the City seems so eager to wage. We find it an abuse of process, prone to favoritism, and chosen in a calculated fashion as the homeless couple in this civil injunction are not afforded a lawyer as they would be in criminal court.

The standard of proof is also weaker-- preponderance of the evidence rather than guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. You are looking to subject homeless people to criminal penalties without the benefit of a criminal trial. 

Until the City provides adequate facilities, subjecting sleeping people to criminal penalties violates the 8th amendment as Federal courts found in Los Angeles and San Diego.

Please drop this civil injunction case ASAP.
 
Call Mayor Mathews at 831-420-5020: Say NO to Bigotry against the Poor !

Protest Anti-homeless Laws: Volunteer at 423-4833

Come to Dept. 4 5-22 Friday 1:30 PM at 701 Ocean St. to oppose The Injunction

Flier by HUFF (Homeless United for Friendship & Freedom) 831-423-4833 http://www.huffsantacruz.org 5-20-09




FLYERING AT THE FARMER'S MARKET AND THE DRUM CIRCLE

A smaller flyer encouraging people to come to the Friday injunction hearing of the two "sleepcriminals" was distributed downtown today by various supporters.

I made an announcement at the Drum Circle letting people know that Anna Richardson's attorney Jonathan Gettleman was hopeful there'd be a large "well-behaved" showing of folks.

Miguel de Leon spoke himself, angrily denouncing the Injunction and expressing his frustration and rage at the situation.

The flyer itself will be shortly posted in case folks want to download and distribute it.




RADIO SHOW TOMORROW

As mentioned in the calendar description of this hearing (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/05/19/18596078.php ), Gettleman is also going to be speaking on my show tomorrow Thursday May 21st at 6:30 PM, for those who want to tune in.

We're hoping to post a sampling of the City Attorney's claims, Gettleman's defense, and two declarations supporting the couple--by homeless social service providers Paul Brindel and Paul Lee.